If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Only thing I'd do different is figure out who we'd need to kidnap or brainwash to trade up to draft Damian Lillard. Other than that, eh. I was a little worried going in. But I'm not as much now.

Well I was looking at Rivers' freshmen college stats and Lillard's. As freshmen against better compeition rivers has better stats all the way around the board. Lillard honed his skills against terrible competition so while it looks good now when rivers reaches the same age as lillard he will be better IMO

But to answers the posters original question if harrison barnes was there i'd take him because hes the perfect type of SF we need, an athletic scorer with an incredible jumpshot but he wasn't so thats not the way it works. For me it was between Rivers and Terrence Jones. Terence jones could definetly play the 3. He has great handles, promising improving jumpshot and great defender and athlete. He could be a josh smith with better handles and jumpshot but I absolutely love Rivers, will be an incredible scorer in 3 years, allen iverson type, quote me.

Well I was looking at Rivers' freshmen college stats and Lillard's. As freshmen against better compeition rivers has better stats all the way around the board. Lillard honed his skills against terrible competition so while it looks good now when rivers reaches the same age as lillard he will be better IMO

I don't understand why people don't take this into account when they compare the 2. Lillard has 3 years of college experience on Rivers. That means a lot. Rivers will be the better player in a few years.

I agree. I think Rookie of the Year is an outdated award. When it was first introduced, you didn't have some rookies who were 19 and others who were 26. In what world should Austin Rivers and Brian Roberts be competing for the same award?

Give me an under 21 Player of the Year Award. an over 21 year old first year Player of the Year award, and an international important first year player of the year award.

Just spitballing, but calling all of these guys rookies as if they are truly in the same class is just hilarious to me

But to answers the posters original question if harrison barnes was there i'd take him because hes the perfect type of SF we need, an athletic scorer with an incredible jumpshot but he wasn't so thats not the way it works. For me it was between Rivers and Terrence Jones. Terence jones could definetly play the 3. He has great handles, promising improving jumpshot and great defender and athlete. He could be a josh smith with better handles and jumpshot but I absolutely love Rivers, will be an incredible scorer in 3 years, allen iverson type, quote me.

I really wanted to trade up with SAC and snag Barnes. He would have fit so perfectly here, but as many already know, I'm a huge Rivers supporter. Given the players available with the 10th pick, and our positions of need, Rivers was the right call. He's only going to get better and better.

"I'm not going to allow my putative owner to answer that question, this is an NBA related press conference. Paul Tagliabue and Roger Goodell have collectively sung their praises of Tom and if uh ESPN has a problem with that tell Mr. Skipper to call me at my office."

I agree. I think Rookie of the Year is an outdated award. When it was first introduced, you didn't have some rookies who were 19 and others who were 26. In what world should Austin Rivers and Brian Roberts be competing for the same award?

Give me an under 21 Player of the Year Award. an over 21 year old first year Player of the Year award, and an international important first year player of the year award.

Just spitballing, but calling all of these guys rookies as if they are truly in the same class is just hilarious to me

I like this idea but I doubt it happens because sometimes the best rookie IS a 19 year old so having a separate over 21 rookie award would kind of be stupid.

4 out of the last 5 ROY's have been from one and dones. It is crazy though that a guy like Kyrie Irving who is tearing up the league is still two years younger than the rookie Damian Lillard.

You mean, besides the fact that he's shooting only 37% from the field over his last 10 games? OOoookay

It doesn't have to be Rivers is a good player or Lillard is a good player. They can both be good in the long run. No need to bash Lillard, he's legit and will be a good player for a long time in this league. Rivers will too if I had to guess. No reason to bash either.

It doesn't have to be Rivers is a good player or Lillard is a good player. They can both be good in the long run. No need to bash Lillard, he's legit and will be a good player for a long time in this league. Rivers will too if I had to guess. No reason to bash either.

I'm not bashing Lillard. I'm just asking for people to stop gawking at the fact that he is averaging 19 points a game, and really look at how he is doing it. If you think 19 points per game on 37% shooting is great, then I don't know what to say to that....

I'm not bashing Lillard. I'm just asking for people to stop gawking at the fact that he is averaging 19 points a game, and really look at how he is doing it. If you think 19 points per game on 37% shooting is great, then I don't know what to say to that....

He's playing almost 40 minutes to get those 19 points. He's GOT to be leading all rookies in minutes. 19pts on 15 shots just isn't very efficient. I think the only questions he has right now is his efficiency and his defense.

Also, the fact that he plays so many minutes could be what contributes to him leading all rookies in turnovers as well.

I'm not bashing Lillard. I'm just asking for people to stop gawking at the fact that he is averaging 19 points a game, and really look at how he is doing it. If you think 19 points per game on 37% shooting is great, then I don't know what to say to that....

He's playing almost 40 minutes to get those 19 points. He's GOT to be leading all rookies in minutes. 19pts on 15 shots just isn't very efficient. I think the only questions he has right now is his efficiency and his defense.

Also, the fact that he plays so many minutes could be what contributes to him leading all rookies in turnovers as well.

Quit bashing the kid. He's having a pretty damn good season and is the rookie of the year. I'm happy for him and glad his skills translated.

Dude, I'm not bashing anyone. Lillard isn't even close to Paul's calibre as a rookie. That's just a fact. Paul had no help, and Lillard has Mathews, Batum, and LMA. That's a lot of help. Plus, you are looking at raw statistics, which is a mistake.

Are you really going to try and tell me that Lillard isn't an inefficient chucker? That isn't me hating on the kid. That's just me reminding people to stop looking at just points per game, which doesn't mean ****. I've watched him play, and his passes rarely land where they should. Half of his assists seem to come from feeding LMA in the post. His shot selection is poor, but not as poor as his defense is. But sure, he's having the same rookie season as Chris Paul.

Dude, I'm not bashing anyone. Lillard isn't even close to Paul's calibre as a rookie. That's just a fact. Paul had no help, and Lillard has Mathews, Batum, and LMA. That's a lot of help. Plus, you are looking at raw statistics, which is a mistake.

Are you really going to try and tell me that Lillard isn't an inefficient chucker? That isn't me hating on the kid. That's just me reminding people to stop looking at just points per game, which doesn't mean ****. I've watched him play, and his passes rarely land where they should. Half of his assists seem to come from feeding LMA in the post. His shot selection is poor, but not as poor as his defense is. But sure, he's having the same rookie season as Chris Paul.

You people need to pump the breaks. Good Lord.

We've all watched him play. you need to pump the brakes on the hate from a guy in his rookie season, dude hasn't figured it out yet. This dude is one year from playing in the big sky and is adjusting very well. I was very impressed with him the 4 or 5 games i've watched of him, and it's not his raw numbers that impress me. It's his ability to break down the defense at will. I'm impressed, you're not. I think he's going to be a very very solid player for a long long time.

We've all watched him play. you need to pump the brakes on the hate from a guy in his rookie season, dude hasn't figured it out yet. This dude is one year from playing in the big sky and is adjusting very well. I was very impressed with him the 4 or 5 games i've watched of him, and it's not his raw numbers that impress me. It's his ability to break down the defense at will. I'm impressed, you're not. I think he's going to be a very very solid player for a long long time.

See the post below.

Originally Posted by NOH2313

Some of you people need to learn that constructive criticism and hate aren't synonmous.

I swear first the Vasquez craze and now this.....

Jesus Christ, it's ridiculous. The ignorance astounds me.

Originally Posted by BallSoHard

Ahem*

Lillard had a horrible game, Vasquez totally owned him, but he did hit the game winner. Again, that doesn't mean he had a good game. This further backs up the notion that your love for Lillard is only skin deep.